BuzzerBeater Forums

The aforementioned updates are now available! The TS is now using the latest data from (http://training.bb-usa.net/). Enjoy.

Thanks a lot for the update, I do have some more questions though:

Reading to coefficients, big players train passing faster than small players; is that correct? It seems a bit odd to me.
If you have a tall player, training 1v1 gets you JS pops faster than training JS?
If you have a tall player and you train HA, DR pops faster if you do 2 position instead of 1?

Reading to coefficients, big players train passing faster than small players; is that correct? It seems a bit odd to me.
If you have a tall player, training 1v1 gets you JS pops faster than training JS?
If you have a tall player and you train HA, DR pops faster if you do 2 position instead of 1?

From my understanding, all positions have the same training speed for PA.

That depends on the big's JS skill, sublevel, height and the trainer level. But I haven't trained JS on a big in recent memory, so I can't say whether or not it is true.

As for your 3rd question, 1-position trains faster than 2-position. However, since getting a pop in DR from HA would come from cross-training, DR would pop faster if you just did 1v1.

Passing trains faster on taller players according to data
could be of course becuse most big guys start out with much lower levels
but the data is across the board, at any age

That's what I would think too, but I'm asking because the data from the training simulator says tall players train PA faster. I don't think the elastic effect has much to do with it, as I believe PA is only pulled up by HA, and HA generally isn't that much higher than PA on bigs I believe.

Again with the 2nd question, I'm just going by the coefficients from the training simulator and the one in the table for 7'6" for 1v1 has a higher coefficient in JS than the JS training has. I"m assuming it's deducted from a large sample, so sublevels and trainer levels should be accounted for.

I know DR pops faster with 1v1 than HA, but if you do train HA, it seems like DR pops faster when you train 2 positions, according to the coefficients. It's all strange to me, that's why I'm asking.

So, I won't claim that this is perfect. What I will claim is that it's based on the best information we have.

The counterintuitive relative training speeds that you have mentioned all show up in places where we don't have much data. The training speeds in the TS are projections of what happens where we have more data.

Very understandable, I can imagine there's not many people that train 2 position HA for bigs. Can you tell how accurate it is approximately? Is it just so little information that you can hardly say anything about it, or does it point to the right direction but the impact could be bigger or smaller?

I don't have the training in statistics to tell you how accurate these numbers are, per se. What I can tell you is how much data the numbers are based on.

Here is how much data we've got:
I'll give you three numbers for each training type. Each entry represents a week where a player got at least 1 minute of training in the given regimen.

Total entries, then entries where player's height is ≤6'7", and then ≥6'8"

Passing (PG) - 3358, 2926, 432

1v1 (F) - 7500, 4328, 3172
1v1 (G) - 3443, 3153, 290
JS (F) - 2406, 1319, 1087
JS (G/W) - 5086, 4529, 657
[JS(W) and JS(G) are treated together since their results were nearly identical]

Handling (PG) - 243, 208, 35
Handling (PG/SG) - 128, 121, 7

Re: Passing – So, your comment prompted me to look into this a little more. And I'll show you what we're dealing with. But I ought to say a one thing first. The Training Simulator, like the "training speed analysis" page on the BB Training Project, models the height effect linearly. But linear models may not be the whole story.

When I look at training speed data for 19yos (the age where we have the most data) for PA(PG) and group it according to height I get this (the # in parenthesis is the number of data points included):

19yo
5'9"-6'3" : .58 (284)
6'4"-6'9" : .65 (178)
6'10"-7'6" : .48 (21)

This suggests the height effect for passing PG might better be represented as a curve (with middle height players receiving the benefit) than as a line. But when we look at 18yo's and 20yo's it looks like this:

18yo
5'9"-6'3" : .62 (235)
6'4"-6'9" : .60 (127)
6'10"-7'6" : .70 (23)

20yo
5'9"-6'3" : .57 (369)
6'4"-6'9" : .54 (153)
6'10"-7'6" : .60 (25)

With 18yo's and 20yo's it looks like there might be a curve that favors the extremes instead of the middle. When the CPU weighs everything in, and assumes a linear model, the TS is what you get. If the line is actually a curve, my guess is that this model matches the short end well and overestimates bigs a little. But that is based on instinct and not data. The data supports exactly what the TS simulates.

As you can see, most people don't train bigs in Passing. So this won't effect most users. But it also gives you a sense of where our data gives us more or less certainty.

When we tested the TS against players we'd trained in the past, it was accurate to within half a pop per skill over 6.5 seasons of training for a 6'4" SF and the same for a 6'2" over 3 seasons.

Thanks a lot for the numbers and the explenation. I hope more people will start training PA on big men as I think it's both very efficient and effective.

The Season 23 version is now ready for download! Check the original post for the link.

Sorry for the delay...